Amnesty International to join constitutional dispute over Sask. pronoun law

Amnesty International Canada has announced it will join a legal battle over Saskatchewan’s controversial pronoun law that it says has “endangered” children.

Passed in October 2023, the Parents’ Bill of Rights requires parental consent for students under 16 to change their names and pronouns while in school.

In passing the bill, the province invoked the notwithstanding clause to shield itself from an ongoing legal challenge from the University of Regina’s UR Pride organization, which argues the law violates the Charter rights of children. 

UR Pride wants a King’s Bench judge to review the law and determine if it violates the Charter, even if the notwithstanding clause means it cannot be struck down by the court, but the province is fighting to prevent a judge from weighing in by turning to the Court of Appeal.

• Get the CTV News app for Saskatchewan breaking news alerts and top stories 

Now, in the wake of a judicial fiat, Amnesty International Canada has joined the debate as an intervenor.

It’s challenging Saskatchewan’s use of Section 33 of the constitution — or the notwithstanding clause — to breach the rights of young people.

“The notwithstanding clause is not a license to discriminate against children and youth and avoid the scrutiny of the courts,” Amnesty International Canada secretary general Ketty Nivyabandi said.

“For its part, Amnesty International Canada will argue that the use of the notwithstanding clause must align with Canada’s obligation to uphold the right to an effective remedy. In other words, the notwithstanding clause does not preclude a person whose rights have been violated from seeking or receiving legal redress,” Amnesty International Canada said in a statement.

Amnesty has until Aug. 16 to submit its arguments in advance of the Sep. 23 hearing.

The human rights organization argues the law makes it harder for trans and non-binary children to have gender-affirming names and pronouns recognized in schools and that risks stifling discussion of gender identity and sexual diversity in the classroom.

In the July 22 fiat from the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, 11 parties were approved to make arguments in the constitutional battle over the pronoun laws.

Earlier this week, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) said it intends to argue that the use of the clause does not prevent the court from being able to review if a law violates the constitution.

Saskatchewan and its allies — the New Brunswick and Alberta attorneys general — say the use of the notwithstanding clause should mean the court has no role here.

—With files from Rory MacLean